SHRI NISSAR AHMAD BHULLA,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR
Facts
The assessee filed twin appeals against confirmation of a quantum addition of Rs. 22.67 Lacs and penalty of Rs. 5.25 Lacs under Section 271(1)(C) for AY 2013-14. The appeals were dismissed by the lower authorities due to the assessee's non-appearance and alleged non-payment of advance tax under Section 249(4)(b), although the assessee claimed non-service of notices and subsequent tax payment.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 14-day delay in one appeal, acknowledging the assessee's negligence but restoring both appeals to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits, directing the assessee to present their case promptly. This decision was made keeping in mind the principles of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing an appeal should be condoned and whether appeals dismissed by lower authorities due to non-appearance should be restored for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
271(1)(C), 249(4)(b), Rule 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JM 1. आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 350/ASR/2024 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 426/ASR/2024 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Nissar Ahmad Bulla ITO Sopore, Iqbal Nagar, Sopore बनाम/ Ward-1 S.O Badam Bagh, Srinagar Vs. Baramulla-193201 (J&K) �ायी लेखा सं./PAN. AJRPB-8879-L (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/Appellant by : Shri. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo (CA)- Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 15-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) In aforesaid twin appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14, 1. the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of quantum addition for Rs.22.67 Lacs and confirmation of consequential penalty u/s 271(1)(C) for Rs.5.25 Lacs. The registry has noted delay of 14 days in quantum appeal ITA No.350/Asr/2024, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation
petition which is accompanied by an affidavit of the assessee. It has been stated that the hearing notices were not served on the assessee and the impugned order was not within the knowledge of the assessee. The Ld. AR also prayed for restoring both these appeals back to Ld. CIT(A) since the assessee has failed to appear before any of the lower authorities. It has been stated that the appeals have been dismissed merely on the ground that the assessee did not paid advance tax in terms of Sec.249(4)(b). The Ld. AR pointed out that the assessee has paid taxes of Rs.1,59,070/- on 06-03-2018. The Ld. Sr. DR has pleaded for dismissal of the appeals. The impugned orders have been passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] on 28-03-2024 and 31-05-2024 respectively. 2. Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we admit the quantum appeal and restore both the appeals back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for do novo adjudication on merits with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. 3. Both the appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.
Sd/- Sd/- (UDAYAN DAS GUPTA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 27/10/2025 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT AMRITSAR
